I realize that Azure SQL Database does not support doing an insert/select from one db into another, even if they're on the same server. We receive data files from clients and we process and load them into a "load database". Once the load is complete, based upon various rules, we then move the data into a production database of which there are about 20, all clones of each other (the data only goes into one of the databases).
Looking for a solution that will allow us to move the data. There can be 500,000 records in a load file and so moving them one by one is not really feasible.
Have you tried Elastic Query? Here is the Getting Started guide for it. Currently you cannot perform remote writes, but you can always read data from remote tables.
Hope this helps!
Silvia Doomra
Related
I need to create a database solely for analytical purposes. The idea here is for it to start off as a 1:1 replica of a current SQL Server database but we will then add in additional tables. The idea here is to be able to have read-write access to a db without dropping anything in production inadvertently.
We would ideally like to set a daily refresh schedule to update all tables in the new tb to match the tables in the live environment.
In terms of the DBMS for the new database, I am very easy - MySQL, SQL Server, PostgreSQL would be great -- I am not hugely familiar with the Google Storage/BigQuery stack but if this is an easy option, I'm open to it.
You could use a standard HA/DR solution with a readable secondary (Availability Groups/mirroring /log shipping).
then have a second database on the new server for your additional tables.
Cloud Storage and BigQuery are not RDBMS services themselves, but could be used in this case to store the backups/exports/dumps from the replica, and then have the analytical work performed on those backups.
Here is an example workflow:
Perform a backup and restore in a different database
Add the new tables in the new database
Export the database as a CSV file on your local machine
Here you could either directly load the CSV file in BigQuery, or upload that file in a Cloud Storage bucket previously created
Query the data
I suggest to take a look at the multiple methods for loading data in BigQuery, as well as the methods for querying against external data sources which may help to determine which database replication/export method might be best for your use case.
We are trying to create a cross-database query using Azure's preview Elastic Query. So we will be creating an External Table to make these queries happen.
Unfortunately, I have some apprehension about how the queries will be executed. I don't want a query or stored procedure to fail at run-time because the database connection fails. I just don't understand how the External Tables work.
Azure's External Table docs have good information on how to query and create the table. I just can't find information that specifically spells out how the data exists.
Oracle's version of external tables is just flat files that are referenced. SQL*Loader loads data from external files into tables of an Oracle database. I couldn't find any documentation about Azure doing the same. (Is it implied that they are the same? Is that a stupid question?)
If it is this way (external flat files), when the external table gets updated, does SQL Server update the flat files so our external table stays up to date? Or will I have to delete/create the link again every time I want to run the query for up to date information?
Per Microsoft Support:
Elastic queries basically works as remote queries which means the data is not stored locally but is pulled from the source database every time you run a query. When you execute a query on an external table, it makes a connection to the source database and gets the data.
With that being said, you do not have to delete/create the links. Once you have performed these steps, you can access the horizontally partitioned table “mytable” as though it were a local table. Azure SQL Database automatically opens multiple parallel connections to the remote databases where the tables are physically stored, processes the requests on the remote databases, and returns the results.
There is no specific risk associated with using this feature but it is simply like opening connections to the source database so it can pull data. Besides this you can expect some slowness when executing a remote query but nothing that will cause any other issues with the database.
In case any of the database becomes unavailable, queries that are using the affected DB as source or target will experience query cancellations or timeouts.
Currently we have 100+ databases, some about 10GB in size with millions of records and they are growing at an alarming rate. We need to evaluate our archiving strategy.
Does anyone have any suggestions and sample scripts that go through all the tables and archives the data into an ARCHIVED database - with everything being audited (in regards to number of records imported etc..) and in case of failure it rolls back everything?
Regards
Partitioning can help a lot to archive within single database. Sliding window scenario is a particular tool.
Let me suggest setting up an Admin database. It will handle all setting and information about archiving.
There may be 2 SQL Server instances: Current Server and Archive Server. They will have same structure.
Process copies data from remote server to archive server using settings from Admin DB. There may be need in writing Dynamic SQL. Check Sp_MSForEachDB.
+1 to partitioning idea. To add - I think you can use it also if you have Developers edition
I am writing code to migrate data from our live Access database to a new Sql Server database which has a different schema with a reorganized structure. This Sql Server database will be used with a new version of our application in development.
I've been writing migrating code in C# that calls Sql Server and Access and transforms the data as required. I migrated for the first time a table which has entries related to new entries of another table that I have not updated recently, and that caused an error because the record in the corresponding table in SQL Server could not be found
So, my SqlServer productions table has data only up to 1/14/09, and I'm continuing to migrate more tables from Access. So I want to write an update method that can figure out what the new stuff is in Access that hasn't been reflected in Sql Server.
My current idea is to write a query on the SQL side which does SELECT Max(RunDate) FROM ProductionRuns, to give me the latest date in that field in the table. On the Access side, I would write a query that does SELECT * FROM ProductionRuns WHERE RunDate > ?, where the parameter is that max date found in SQL Server, and perform my translation step in code, and then insert the new data in Sql Server.
What I'm wondering is, do I have the syntax right for getting the latest date in that Sql Server table? And is there a better way to do this kind of migration of a live database?
Edit: What I've done is make a copy of the current live database. Which I can then migrate without worrying about changes, then use that to test during development, and then I can migrate the latest data whenever the new database and application go live.
I personally would divide the process into two steps.
I would create an exact copy of Access DB in SQLServer and copy all the data
Copy the data from this temporary SQLServer DB to your destination database
In that way you can write set of SQL code to accomplish second step task
Alternatively use SSIS
Generally when you convert data to a new database that will take it's place in porduction, you shut out all users of the database for a period of time, run the migration and turn on the new database. This ensures no changes to the data are made while doing the conversion. Of course I never would have done this using c# either. Data migration is a database task and should have been done in SSIS (or DTS if you have an older version of SQL Server).
If the databse you are converting to is just in development, I would create a backup of the Access database and load the data from there to test the data loading process and to get the data in so you can do the application development. Then when it is time to do the real load, you just close down the real database to users and use it to load from. If you are trying to keep both in synch wile you develop, well I wouldn't do that but if you must, make a nightly backup of the file and load first thing in the morning using your process.
You may want to look at investing in a tool like SQL Data Compare.
I believe it has support for access databases too, and you can download a trial.
I you are happy with you C# code, but it fails because of the constraints in your destination database you temporarily can disable them and then enable after you copy the whole lot.
I am assuming that your destination database is brand new DB with no data, and not used by anyone when the transfer happens
It sounds like you have two problems:
You're migrating data from one database to another.
You're changing your schema.
Doing either of these things is tricky if you are trying to migrate the data while people are using the data.
The simplest approach is to migrate the data based on a static copy of the data, and also to queue updates to that data from the moment you captured the static copy. I don't know how easy this is in Access, but in SQLServer or Oracle you can use the redo logs for this or a manual solution using triggers. The poor-man's way of doing this is to make triggers for all the relevant tables that log the primary key of the records that have changed. Then after the old database is shut off you can iterate over those keys and get those records from the old database and put them into the new database. Just copy the whole record; if the record was deleted then delete it from the new database.
Your problem is compounded by the fact that you can't simply copy the data, you have to transform it. This means you probably have to shut down both databases and re-migrate the records based on the change list. It will take a lot of planning to ensure you get things right and I'd recommend writing a testing script that can validate that the resulting data is correct.
Also I'd ensure that the code for the migration runs inside one of the databases if possible. Otherwise you are copying the data twice and this will significantly harm the performance.
I am developing an Adobe AIR application which stores data locally using a SQLite database.
At any time, I want the end user to synchronize his/her local data to a central MySQL database.
Any tips, advice for getting this right?
Performance and stability is the key (besides security ;))
I can think of a couple of ways:
Periodically, Dump your MySQL database and create a new SQLite database from the dump. You can then serve the SQLite database (SQLite databases are contained in a single file) for your users client to download and replace the current database.
Create a diff script that generates the necessary statements to bring the current database up to speed (various INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE statements). To do this, you must record the time of each change continuously in your database (the time of creation and update for each row, and keep a history of deleted rows).
User's client will download the diff file (a text file of the various statements) and apply it on the local database.
Both approaches have their own pros and cons - by dumping the entire database, you make sure all the data gets through. It is also much easier than creating the diff, however it might put more load on the server, depending on how often does the database gets updated between dumps.
On the other hand, diffing between the database will give you just the data that changed (hopefully), but it is more open to logical errors. It will incur an additional overhead on the client as well, since it will have to create/update all the necessary records instead of just copying a file.
If you're just sync'ing from the server to client, Eran's solution should work.
If you're just sync'ing from the client to the server, just reverse it.
If you're sync'ing both ways, have fun. You'll at minimum probably want to keep change logs, and you'll need to figure out how to deal with conflicts.